StatCounter

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Seated at the head
of a square of tables last week, California water officials – led
by Jerry Meral of the state resources agency and surrounded by
consultants – tried to answer questions concerning the hugely
controversial Bay Delta Conservation Plan.

Deputy Resources Secretary, Jerry Meral (L), and ICF International
consultants, Jennifer Pierre and David Zippin, at the BDCP meeting.
Photo by Dan Bacher

Around the square
were people who would be powerfully affected by the plan – a
project to construct two massive tunnels beneath the Sacramento/San
Joaquin Delta for diverting water from north to south. There was Ann
Spaulding from Antioch, where water could turn saltier as a result of
the diversion. There was Richard Pool, from sportsfishing
organizations that care deeply about saving salmon runs from the
threat of too-little water. There was Osha Meserve, a lawyer working
to save the North Delta, where the diversions would begin, from
irreparable losses. There was Jason Peltier from the Westlands Water
District, an agricultural powerhouse that is legendary for its
ability to turn state and Federal policy to its own benefit.

One thing not
present at the meeting was equality. Peltier's district (along with a few other big
contractors) had everything to do with writing the plan; the rest of
the stakeholders, little or nothing. How did it happen and what do
we do about the prospect of a multibillion dollar project being built
– the largest water infrastructure project in California since
1960 – without a vote of the people or the legislature? Moreover,
the five Delta counties – Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin,
Solano and Yolo – whose water supply and agricultural land will be
affected, oppose the plan. They have not had a role in its creation.

Attorney Osha Meserve at the Sacramento River

Some people in the
water world accept this inequality as a matter of course. One top
state official said flatly (in a recent interview) “Money drives
policy, not the other way around.” There was no regret in his
voice, just a sense that the world works this way. Others, like
Meserve, continue to fight the odds, despite slim returns, while many
just plan their next legal challenge, hoping to tie up the project in
court.

If that happens –
and there's every reason to think it will – California's hopes for
solving the Delta's problems will probably squeal to a stop again, as
in the past, raising serious questions about whether there was a
better way – or, indeed, any way – to make progress on such
a “wicked” problem.

As defined by Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber in 1973, a wicked problem is so
multifaceted it has no clear definition, no good scientific answer,
no unambiguous interpretation of the public good. Its “solution”
depends on how the problem is framed. Moreover, those invested in
the problem (stakeholders) hold radically different world views and
espouse competing frameworks. There are few ways to solve a wicked
problem. One way is to resort to authority, restricting the number
of people whose inputs count. Governments often do this in making
policy decisions on wicked problems, and that is what has happened in
the Delta with this project. The other way is to collaborate.

Could the state have
made “ those people who are being affected into participants of the planning process,”
as Rittel recommended? Could it have included people who
are not merely asked, but actively involved in the planning
process....?

If
the struggles of indigenous peoples around the world to have a say in
the development of their lands and resources are any indication, the
answer is, yes. Five
years ago, 144 countries signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, calling upon States to
“consult and cooperate in good faith” with indigenous people. In
particular, States should obtain “free, prior and informed consent”
to any decisions regarding the lands and resources traditionally used
by native peoples. Prior consent is crucial. In other words, if you
want resources, you have to negotiate with the locals from the
beginning.

That
is happening in many parts of the world today – in Ecuador,
Bolivia, and Brazil, for example. The Declaration and its principle
of free, prior, informed consent have newly empowered indigenous
peoples, writes international legal scholar Siegfried Wiessner, of St Thomas University School of law in Miami. As women did 40 years ago in their quest for equality, it's time to "think globally and act locally."

The
principle has been particularly salient among peoples of the forest:
“By
insisting on their right to free, prior and informed consent, forest
peoples have been able to block plantations and dams planned for
their lands and have been able to negotiate fairer deals with palm
oil developers, loggers and local government land use planners,”
according to the global Forest People's Programme.

Delta's unique cultural traditions at risk in water plan.

The
idea is not to halt progress, but to channel it through negotiations
with rural and established communities – as in the Delta – whose customs and survival matter. It
may be that California needs a tunnel for delivering water under the
Delta. The current pumps in Tracy chew up fish big time. And big
releases of water from upstream reservoirs at unnatural times distort
the Delta's ecology.

But
the size and location of those tunnels has never been open to
discussion with the millions of us affected. And there's the rub.

Back
at the meeting, there were few answers for the urgent questions.

How
much water will be left in the Sacramento River during drought and
dry times of the year? Meserve wanted to know. Delta residents are
acutely aware that the tunnels could take ALL the water in the river
during dry periods. So far, they have seen no base limits on
diversion.

Pool
was concerned about the flow available to salmon. He said he
could no find answers in the 5,000 pages of the plan's first
environmental draft report. Meral
promised that the next environmental report, due in October – maybe
– will clear things up. And, he assured them, there would be
mitigation for any damage done.

To
be fair, the state agencies and consultants were doing their best.
They just don't have the answers. Fish agencies and contractors are
locked in debate over the amount of water that can be safely exported
– safely, as in not destroying any species, ruining Delta
agriculture, or turning the water in Contra Costa County into an
undrinkable salt solution.

Water contractors
want to export an average of 6 million acre feet per year from the
Delta. California fish and game scientists say they won't get that
much – an amount most environmentalists believe is responsible for
the recent collapse of the fish populations.

The diversion “is
more likely to be what they have now,” said Carl Wilcox, a
biologist at the table representing California's Department of Fish
and Game. That would be 4.8 million acre feet, since contractors now
must operate under court restriction to preserve fish species.
“Maybe, the number will go into the low fives” (million acre
feet), but not six, said Wilcox.

Manager Ronald Jacobsma of Friant Water Authority

Once the level of
exports is agreed upon (if that happens), the next mountain to climb
is identifying the payers for this massive construction. Also at the
meeting was general manager Ronald Jacobsma of the Friant Water
authority, a combine of two dozen water districts in the Fresno area,
none of which receive ANY water from the Delta, nor would they if the
tunnels were built. Nevertheless, these water agencies have been
advised they must ante up 15% of the $20 billion cost of
construction.

Who told them they
would have to pay? The State Water Contractors who receive Delta
water and want the tunnels built – and they have the power of
government behind them. Despite Jacobsma's vigorous campaign to get
Friant's name removed from the list of payers, it's still there two
years later, apparently because Friant gets water through a Federal
project on the San Joaquin River, upstream from the Delta.

“We want a
beneficiary analysis done,” Jacobsma said. Peltier responded with
the comment that all Federal water contractors would have to pay
capital costs on the Delta tunnel no matter where they were located.

Jacobsma made a
broad comic gesture, grabbing for his wallet in his back pocket and the
room erupted in laughter. Jacobsma, a friendly sort, laughed too, but the crazy prospect of water users paying billions of dollars for nary a drop was ultimately no joke.

About Me

Journalist/anthropologist; author of two books, former science and magazine writer with the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Published "The Third Sex," on women adapting to formerly all-male career roles in the financial districts of New York and San Francisco in 1986 with wide reviews.
As professor, taught courses on women and work at UC Berkeley, Mills College, Rutgers University and Diablo Valley College. Affiliated with the California Studies Association at UC Berkeley.